Sentences with phrase «much less greenhouse gas»

Though burning natural gas produces much less greenhouse gas emissions than burning coal, a new study indicates switching over coal - fired power plants to natural gas would have a negligible effect on the changing climate.

Both solutions are emitting much less greenhouse gases than fossil fuels.

This technology is expected to become commercially competitive and generate much less greenhouse gases compared to fossil fuels.

If each province in China was to declare itself an independent country tomorrow — each producing much less greenhouse gasses than the whole of China — would this mean that all of the new states would have a much reduced responsibility to lessen their greenhouse gas production rates?

Not exact matches

Eating less meat is of course a vital way to help prevent the cruelty to and suffering of animals and benefits the environment: livestock production could be responsible for as much as 51 % of global greenhouse gas emissions.»

The discovery could lead to metal - production systems that are much less expensive and that virtually eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions associated with most traditional metal smelting.

Although natural gas generates less greenhouse gas than coal when burned, when its total life - cycle emissions associated with extraction and distribution are factored in, it does not seem much cleaner than coal

«We see no evidence of Kyoto actually leading to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, much less of stimulating the fundamental technological change that will be required to achieve the 60 - 80 % reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that scientists tell us the world will need to achieve in order to prevent what the Framework Convention calls «dangerous interference with the atmosphere».»

The «well - to - wire» research showed new natural - gas power plants are responsible for less than half as much greenhouse gas per kilowatt hour of electricity generated as existing coal power plants.

But as anyone who has watched the past 15 years of international climate negotiations can attest, most countries are still reluctant to take meaningful steps to lower their production of greenhouse gases, much less address issues such as how to help developing countries protect themselves from the extreme effects of climate change.

A less active sun would probably have a small cooling effect on earth's temperature, if man - made greenhouse gases weren't having a much bigger warming influence.

This is much less than the current «best estimate» of about 3 deg.C, and would imply that there is * not * any unfelt warming «still in the pipeline» from greenhouse gases we've already emitted.

The positive energy imbalance in 2005 — 2010 confirms that the effect of solar variability on climate is much less than the effect of human - made greenhouse gases.

The general consensus among scientists is that the young Earth's atmosphere contained much larger quantities of greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide and / or ammonia) than are present today, which trapped enough heat to compensate for the lesser amount of solar energy reaching the planet.

However, the net effect in terms of forcing is only about 0.27 W / m ^ 2 — much less than greenhouse gas forcing.

On the contrary, roughly 80 percent of HOT is devoted to on - the - ground reporting that focuses on solutions — not just the relatively well known options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and otherwise limiting global warming, but especially the related but much less recognized imperative of preparing our societies for the many significant climate impacts (e.g., stronger storms, deeper droughts, harsher heat waves, etc.,) that, alas, are now unavoidable over the years ahead.

Much less challenging, and high profile, is the need, in a world heading toward nine billion people, to figure out how to make everything that's been learned about drought, floods, and other climate - related risks useful to the majority of the human population — people in Niger and Bangladesh who face such risks every day right now, with or without whatever climate destabilization is coming from the ongoing buildup of greenhouse gases.

1) Greenhouse gasses absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere and re-emit much of it back toward the surface, thus warming the planet (less heat escapes; Fourier, 1824).

However, the Canadian government has no credible plan for stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions, much less reducing them.»

This communication already includes information regarding China's greenhouse gas inventory, albeit in much less detail and than is required for Annex I countries, and also using emissions from way back in 1994!.

Coupled models simulate much less warming over the 20th century in response to solar forcing alone than to greenhouse gas forcing (Cubasch et al., 1997; Broccoli et al., 2003; Meehl et al., 2004), independent of which solar forcing reconstruction is used (Chapter 2).

Conservatives should embrace a carbon tax (a much less costly means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions) in return for elimination of EPA regulatory authority over greenhouse gas emissions, abolition of green energy subsidies and regulatory mandates, and offsetting tax cuts to provide for revenue neutrality.

The summer - winter changes in insolation are much larger than those due to human - induced greenhouse gas changes; the seasonal change is mainly in the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum while the greenhouse gas forcing is in the infrared; the greenhouse gas influence is global while the seasonal changes are opposite in the two hemispheres; and we have a much longer history of observing the seasonal changes, so a more or less correct prediction can be made empirically, without any physical understanding.

However, the call for control of greenhouse gas emissions in Agenda 21 is much less precise than the obligations to adopt policies and practices to prevent the threat of climate change that the George H.W. Bush administration had agreed to when it negotiated and Congress ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992.

It cited «plausible scenarios in which GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions from corn - grain ethanol are much higher than those of petroleum - based fuels,» and questioned the method by which EPA determined that ethanol would produce 21 percent less emissions.

What is much less appreciated, however, is just how effective of a gas it is in maintaining the greenhouse framework that helps to characterize the modern climate.

The GOP field remains mostly in lockstep on the issue: John McCain backs mandatory cuts in greenhouse gases, but the remaining Republican candidates are much less enthusiastic about the prospect of such massive regulation.

If we fail to take serious action very soon to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, the future climate will be much less hospitable than today's, with potentially catastrophic results; however, our political leaders are currently failing to take the necessary steps to avoid a potentially catastrophic future.

He stood up, in front of a group of business leaders no less, and stated that Canada's current greenhouse gas emissions policies would not be sufficient to meet our targets, and that we needed much broader regulation.

CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas, but much less important than the major greenhouse gas, water vapor (H2O) and clouds.

And in fact when you look at the scientific literature, it's an interesting disconnect because the modelers who study emissions and how to control those emissions are generally much more comfortable setting goals in terms of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas concentrations because that comes more or less directly out of their models and is much more proximate or more closely connected to what humans actually do to screw up the climate in the first place, which is emit these greenhouse gases.

While much attention has been given to scrutinising the level of ambition of each country's intended nationally determined contribution (INDC) in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, less focus has been paid to exactly how credible these pledges are.

That's right, the latest climate science (some 10 studies published in just the past 3 years) indicates that the earth's climate sensitivity — that is, how much the global average surface temperature will rise as a result of greenhouse gases emitted from human activities — is some 33 percent less than scientists thought at the time of the last IPCC Assessment, published in 2007.

It suggested that the climate might be much less sensitive to greenhouse gases than had been claimed by the IPCC in its report last September, and recommended that more work be carried out «to reduce the underlying uncertainty».

There is a near infinite supply of greenhouse gases available to the atmosphere in the form of water vapor from the ocean to provide the greenhouse effect, but the relative humidity in the atmosphere is much less than one.

Second, the «warming» from CO2 — and yes, CO2 is a «greenhouse gas» — has been much less than predicted by the climate models Obama bases his policies on.

The positive energy imbalance in 2005 — 2010 confirms that the effect of solar variability on climate is much less than the effect of human - made greenhouse gases.

The implemented wastewater treatment solution requires much less energy and produces less greenhouse gases (GHG), methane in particular, than typical wastewater treatment systems.

Water vapour is a strong greenhouse gas and the dry desert air traps much less heat than more humid areas.

You have no grounds for assuming this unless you can produce temperature data evidence that the most predominant greenhouse gas water vapour makes moist regions considerably warmer than dry regions where there may be less than 25 % as much water vapour.

Solar forcing is the only known natural forcing acting to warm the climate over this period but it has increased much less than greenhouse gas forcing, and the observed pattern of long term tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling is not consistent with the expected response to solar irradiance variations.

Each of those assessments attempts to account for all the greenhouse gases emitted during the production and installation of solar cells, as well as how much energy solar cells produce — and, therefore, how much less carbon is emitted when switching from fossil fuels.

However, the study finds much less severe climate change — one - quarter to one - third that of the «business - as - usual» scenario — when greenhouse gas emissions follow the alternative scenario.

And emissions reductions are much less valuable (to this administration), meaning that any greenhouse gas regulation will be less beneficial.

Generally, coal - fired power stations are inflexible in their power output; gas - fired power stations are much more flexible; they produce greenhouse gasses too, just rather less than coal - fired power stations.

In fact, the average resident of Manhattan uses much less energy, and has a much smaller carbon footprintAmount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that a person, community, industry, or other entity contributes to the atmosphere through energy use, transportation, and other means.

When you said «What we KNOW is that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, much less important than water vapor,», you don't understand, or won't understand, AGW; as somebody said, a stressed denier.

When he entered government a year later, the Conservatives started to lay the groundwork for much less ambitious greenhouse gas reductions.

Answer: The forcing of greenhouse gases is counteracted by about 1 Watt / m2 of aerosols, leaving us with 1.5 W / m2 or thereabouts, or less than half that of a doubling of CO2 (3.7 W / m2), and thermal inertia cuts that by half again for the high end sensitivities, and not much of a cut is required for the low end sensitivites (1.5 C times fraction of forcing 1.5 / 3.7 giving about 0.6 C).

While less meat gets wasted than does fruit and vegetables, the amount of energy required to produce meat is «significantly» more than that for plant - based food production, which means that the associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from meat production is also much higher, leading researchers to indicate that meat waste has a «greater negative environmental impact.»